|
Fair points... But my question is more technical in nature... I'm puzzled that tesla can squeeze enough battery into its car(even the small one) to make 300 mi / or make it fun and attractive to sporty cars buyers, while the big boys are peaking at 90 mi AND boring ;-) I don't think anyone ever accused the Leaf of being fun. Is the batteries 70% of the Tesla cost ? Would it be prohibitive to add 50 miles of range/fun equivalent to a Leaf/Egolf?
Is it just that the Tesla is that big and chock full of batteries in every orifice, or a different battery type, or ? I agree the leaf does not need more range as a pure commuter, but in the tesla's case you can trade the extra range for fun or greatly extend usefulness. The E-golf / Leaf provide neither.... I'm just wondering from a technical standpoint why nobody else has announced a Tesla 3 fighter yet - after the marketgasm of orders - seems to me the big manufacturers can do it for less, and tesla proved there is a market...
My sister in law bought an Egolf and I'm totally puzzled by that car (or the leaf). Range is real life 85 miles, roundtrip, aka useless for anything but commuting nearby. If they suspect traffic or an hour drive, they take their gasoline car because it's too close for comfort. And it's slower than a GTI, to boot... I guess that's the price point/range point the marketing came up with, but I know I would never buy one, while I'd buy a Tesla 3 if it were prettier.... Tesla can do it for $35, so $42K without subsidies... Why can't VW, BMW, GM beat them with economies of manufacturing?
|